ICC defers decision on presidency

The ICC's Executive Board has deferred till October, when it next meets, a decision over a proposed amendment of its constitution regarding the appointment of its president. The amendment seeks to replace the current rotational system with an open candidature.

In its deliberations this morning, the Executive Board decided not to take the matter to the Full Council for a vote when it meets tomorrow on the final day of the annual conference. Today's meeting went as expected with the PCB objecting, as it had done in May, and Bangladesh arguing that the amendment should take place on completion of the full cycle of the rotational policy, which would be after the 2014 candidates for president and vice-president were named by Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Along with Pakistan and Bangladesh - who have agreed to not nominate a candidate for ICC Vice-President before the matter is again considered by the Executive Board - a third member of the Executive Board approved of deferring the amendment on procedural grounds. The member said that while they supported the idea of only the most meritorious candidates taking on the job of ICC president, the issue of a constitutional amendment needed a more careful and reasoned deliberation than how it had been done in May - by circular resolution, through written communication alone. The decision, the Full Member said, was far too important to be taken without a full and proper discussion by the Board.

Between now and its next meeting in October, the Executive Board will discuss the matter and it will once again be brought to vote if necessary. By then the Governance Review Committee would have completed its look at all related matters - including the possibility of appointing independent directors.

Should the amendment reach the Full Council, another annual general meeting could be called between now and June of 2012 to push it through. In June 2012, the ICC will have to pick a successor to New Zealand's Alan Isaac for the position of ICC president. Within the next 12 months, the ICC will have to either push through the amendment or stick with the rotational policy, in which case someone from Pakistan or Bangladesh will assume the highest office in cricket in 2014. The choice of candidate to succeed Alan Isaac as of now still belongs to Bangladesh-Pakistan, but those who want the change will use the next four months to build consensus and strike deals.

Nonetheless Wednesday's events, in which a gathering of the least powerful of cricketing nations had through will and argument managed to hold off cricket's most forceful nations, were marked by scenes of unity and celebration among the underdogs. After the Executive Board meeting had ended, Sri Lankan cricket officials were discussing their repeated and unsuccessful attempts to win over the BCCI on the SLPL issue. A member of the Bangladeshi delegation walked up to them, shook hands and said, "Good fight."

By sticking to its stance on abstaining on the issue, the Sri Lankans ensured that the eight votes needed to pass any decision would not be earned. The fourth member nation who wanted the procedure around the May resolution to be discussed as much as the merit of the argument in favour of the amendment, had ensured that it could not be taken to the Full Council.

The Pakistan delegation had waited outside the Executive Board meeting room for news from within. Whenever they were questioned about whether they had heard what was happening inside, they replied with a laugh, "We haven't heard the sound of fireworks yet."

Once the Executive Board ended its meetings, the Asian Cricket Council gathered for their AGM. It lasted all of 30 minutes and, for its duration, neither ICC president Sharad Pawar nor was BCCI president Shashank Manohar was seen entering the conference room from its main entrance. It is learnt that BCCI secretary N Srinivasan left Hong Kong on Tuesday itself.

The ICC's gala dinner tonight for members was kicked off with a three-man panel of speakers including former West Indian captain Clive Lloyd, former India captain Sourav Ganguly and Australian allrounder Shane Watson. The members moved to a neighbouring venue, Hong Kong's tallest building, a 484m tall tower block only completed last year. It is found everywhere on local road signs and also goes under the name of ICC but is not cricket's new home.

The abbreviation stands for the International Commerce Centre, which many could argue is what the ICC's annual conference could have ended up as, but for a few skirmishes that went in the way of the underdogs.

@third_gear there already is a double standard the momment that they vetoed the australian/new zealand candidate in howard after allowing ray mali the time before. pakistan and bangledesh have already had a turn under the current system. it needs to be changed asap as pushing ahead with a flawed system is a joke!

Monjur_Elahi
on June 29, 2011, 22:43 GMT

By the meeting in October another will be added to bought list, will be interested to see who joins the team.

Monjur_Elahi
on June 29, 2011, 18:26 GMT

Brilliant!! At last some guts! I wonder why ECB and AUS, RSA and NZ are not standing up and say what is right!!! This may bite them in the future. Isn't India asking for too much, open window for IPL, opposing SLPL, no hosting ZIM, BD, a clear aggression and hunger for money, not for cricket, ultimate demonstration of muscle. On the other hand, its good to see the Indians dominating the monarchs and telling them what to do. But Pakistan is suffering a domestic disturbance does not mean that the others should be harsh on PAK and abandon them. They should be helped so that they can survive this crisis and keep feeding the cricket world with their exciting talents in the days to come.

khurramsch
on June 29, 2011, 17:34 GMT

change the policy after each country gets a chance & cycle finished. its not fair taht some get benifited & when turn of others come u change it. 2nd ICC is international so each member should get chance to be nominate a candidate turn by turn. & we all know what merit will mean in ICC. it will then only b 2/3 big boards like india , aus, eng everytime. which is no good for game.
the purpose of roptation policy was to allow each member to nominate a person & if others dont think they can vote against him. so if people have problem with pak they simply vote bangla. thats fine everybody gets chance.

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 16:48 GMT

@Secunderabadi lol ...Srilanka will never visit Pakistan after what happened to them ...even pak players are not comfortable playing in pakistan ...that's why afridi is playing in England and not in Pak T20 that is currently taking place

KingofBlades
on June 29, 2011, 16:31 GMT

why does BCCI have so much power?

monayi
on June 29, 2011, 16:21 GMT

We cannot blame BCCI..Because most of the earnings and profit are coming from India...Compared to other countries, Cricket is very much passionate in India...

sachin_vvsfan
on June 29, 2011, 14:54 GMT

@JawadSyed Howards rejection happened after Sharad Pawar came in. FYI. And you still think it is INDIA always.

heat-seeker
on June 29, 2011, 14:36 GMT

ICC President! What exactly are his powers?

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 14:25 GMT

i think pakistan bangladesh and srilanka should create own group...against bcci.asian countries do have problems in their countries but i wonder why the other countries like australia new zealand and south africa did not take step against bcci,s will.ironicaly....

redneck
on June 30, 2011, 1:39 GMT

@third_gear there already is a double standard the momment that they vetoed the australian/new zealand candidate in howard after allowing ray mali the time before. pakistan and bangledesh have already had a turn under the current system. it needs to be changed asap as pushing ahead with a flawed system is a joke!

Monjur_Elahi
on June 29, 2011, 22:43 GMT

By the meeting in October another will be added to bought list, will be interested to see who joins the team.

Monjur_Elahi
on June 29, 2011, 18:26 GMT

Brilliant!! At last some guts! I wonder why ECB and AUS, RSA and NZ are not standing up and say what is right!!! This may bite them in the future. Isn't India asking for too much, open window for IPL, opposing SLPL, no hosting ZIM, BD, a clear aggression and hunger for money, not for cricket, ultimate demonstration of muscle. On the other hand, its good to see the Indians dominating the monarchs and telling them what to do. But Pakistan is suffering a domestic disturbance does not mean that the others should be harsh on PAK and abandon them. They should be helped so that they can survive this crisis and keep feeding the cricket world with their exciting talents in the days to come.

khurramsch
on June 29, 2011, 17:34 GMT

change the policy after each country gets a chance & cycle finished. its not fair taht some get benifited & when turn of others come u change it. 2nd ICC is international so each member should get chance to be nominate a candidate turn by turn. & we all know what merit will mean in ICC. it will then only b 2/3 big boards like india , aus, eng everytime. which is no good for game.
the purpose of roptation policy was to allow each member to nominate a person & if others dont think they can vote against him. so if people have problem with pak they simply vote bangla. thats fine everybody gets chance.

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 16:48 GMT

@Secunderabadi lol ...Srilanka will never visit Pakistan after what happened to them ...even pak players are not comfortable playing in pakistan ...that's why afridi is playing in England and not in Pak T20 that is currently taking place

KingofBlades
on June 29, 2011, 16:31 GMT

why does BCCI have so much power?

monayi
on June 29, 2011, 16:21 GMT

We cannot blame BCCI..Because most of the earnings and profit are coming from India...Compared to other countries, Cricket is very much passionate in India...

sachin_vvsfan
on June 29, 2011, 14:54 GMT

@JawadSyed Howards rejection happened after Sharad Pawar came in. FYI. And you still think it is INDIA always.

heat-seeker
on June 29, 2011, 14:36 GMT

ICC President! What exactly are his powers?

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 14:25 GMT

i think pakistan bangladesh and srilanka should create own group...against bcci.asian countries do have problems in their countries but i wonder why the other countries like australia new zealand and south africa did not take step against bcci,s will.ironicaly....

Poliwag060
on June 29, 2011, 14:04 GMT

STOP PAMPERING TO INDIA PLEASE ICC!

tvumpire.com
on June 29, 2011, 13:47 GMT

@tick there was rain in England between the ODI series...BCCI must be behind that...lol...losers will cry foul..:P

Secunderabadi
on June 29, 2011, 13:47 GMT

I wonder who proposed a change in the rotational policy. The SLanka support of the PCB-BCB duo is interesting fact to note. PCB should invite SL and Bdesh to play in Pakistan and see how the security situation is in Pakistan as these 2 seem to be the only teams sympathetic to PCB. International tournament in Pakistan can be considered after SL and Ban say it is safe to play there.

The Indians should have agreed to at least send their B or C team to play in BDesh. Oh the issue was more of B'desh visiting India. I think India should consider it, but I wonder who will pay for their trip and for the Ball tracking system and UDRS. Crowd support will be minimal but they can play in cities where no international cricket is played and that will bring some crowd.

All the best cricket world

desi_picasso
on June 29, 2011, 13:13 GMT

Amazed that PCB and BDB are in position to be counted.

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 12:53 GMT

For those thinking Pakistan or Bangladesh are incapable either are senseless or over smart. Ihsan Mani ICC Ex-President was from Pakistan and still widely respected in world and person like Mr. Mohammad Younis ( Grameen Bank) belongs to Bangladesh. So Pakistanis and Bangalis are as capable or incapable like other nation people. The point is rich boards do not like to share power to poor boards because they feel insecure for their stupid acts . If rotation policy is bad now it was also bad earlier, why the did not raise voice at that time. I am sure if cricket is high jacked continuously by money time is not far away when it will be played only 3 to 4 counties.

JawadSyed
on June 29, 2011, 12:09 GMT

If india feels so strongly that the rotational policy be abolished, then they should have brought it up before sharad powar became president.

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 11:55 GMT

wow, finally a matter where PCB stood and got the decision against the will of BCCI, CA, ECB. I got a feeling that Sri Lanka or South Africa might be the supporter.

AndyZaltzmannsHair
on June 29, 2011, 11:41 GMT

Another fudged up mess. Keep it as a rotational policy (if only to at least spread a little bit of the power to other boards). And if any board decides to nominate a silly person, vote against him. Simple as that. A rotational policy is not just good for Pak and Bang short term, it is in the interests of everyone in the long term. BCCI still has the financial power but it at least has to listen (somewhat) to others, which is fair since this is a world game.

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 10:54 GMT

The Rotational policy must be changed now... this is very bad to discuss furher in October.

Sarfin
on June 29, 2011, 10:14 GMT

Interesting!! Few days ago an Indian newspaper said that BCB agreed to support BCCI on this cause and now they've changed their mind!!! Consequence of the latest FTP??? Whatever the reason is, I am glad at least some boards stood against BCCI. I support the proposed change. But not now. As there is no power balance in cricketing world now, strongest boards will elect their candidates (probably by mutual understanding) and they'll serve their causes only. I don't see any meritorious mind to elect. So, this wonderful proposal from BCCI should be postponed until a power balance in ICC is established.

tick
on June 29, 2011, 9:42 GMT

the third board is srilanka..you need 8 votes to approve...so pakistan,bangladesh and srilanka together left 7 votes.....bcci can't face the embarsement if voting goes on schedule...hahahhhaahahah..now they will tour bangladesh and allow players to play in slpl...

ianChappellFan
on June 29, 2011, 9:31 GMT

icc is a loser, reminds me a lot of my ex-bosses who were an example of how not to do manage.

tvumpire.com
on June 29, 2011, 8:54 GMT

oh my god PCB and BDB got a supporter! lol

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 8:53 GMT

Lorgat and Pawar should be thrown out, if they go by a "meritorious" appointment. :P

anshu.s
on June 29, 2011, 8:33 GMT

Watever worth is my 2 penny advice, still i feel none of da readers care who ICC president is .....

Third_Gear
on June 29, 2011, 8:03 GMT

ICC must allow the cycle to finish once and then only go for any new decision. Otherwise it will prove a double standard of their policy.

skumar8494
on June 29, 2011, 8:02 GMT

The Rotational policy must be changed now... this is very bad to discuss furher in October.

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 7:54 GMT

Ooo one board. Hmm I wonder which board. Hmmmm.

khurramsch
on June 29, 2011, 7:45 GMT

if icc want to change it , its ok but give each member a chance. its not fair that some has benifited and when turn of others came u change not.

No featured comments at the moment.

khurramsch
on June 29, 2011, 7:45 GMT

if icc want to change it , its ok but give each member a chance. its not fair that some has benifited and when turn of others came u change not.

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 7:54 GMT

Ooo one board. Hmm I wonder which board. Hmmmm.

skumar8494
on June 29, 2011, 8:02 GMT

The Rotational policy must be changed now... this is very bad to discuss furher in October.

Third_Gear
on June 29, 2011, 8:03 GMT

ICC must allow the cycle to finish once and then only go for any new decision. Otherwise it will prove a double standard of their policy.

anshu.s
on June 29, 2011, 8:33 GMT

Watever worth is my 2 penny advice, still i feel none of da readers care who ICC president is .....

dummy4fb
on June 29, 2011, 8:53 GMT

Lorgat and Pawar should be thrown out, if they go by a "meritorious" appointment. :P

tvumpire.com
on June 29, 2011, 8:54 GMT

oh my god PCB and BDB got a supporter! lol

ianChappellFan
on June 29, 2011, 9:31 GMT

icc is a loser, reminds me a lot of my ex-bosses who were an example of how not to do manage.

tick
on June 29, 2011, 9:42 GMT

the third board is srilanka..you need 8 votes to approve...so pakistan,bangladesh and srilanka together left 7 votes.....bcci can't face the embarsement if voting goes on schedule...hahahhhaahahah..now they will tour bangladesh and allow players to play in slpl...

Sarfin
on June 29, 2011, 10:14 GMT

Interesting!! Few days ago an Indian newspaper said that BCB agreed to support BCCI on this cause and now they've changed their mind!!! Consequence of the latest FTP??? Whatever the reason is, I am glad at least some boards stood against BCCI. I support the proposed change. But not now. As there is no power balance in cricketing world now, strongest boards will elect their candidates (probably by mutual understanding) and they'll serve their causes only. I don't see any meritorious mind to elect. So, this wonderful proposal from BCCI should be postponed until a power balance in ICC is established.